Raab Stephen S, Nakhleh Raouf E, Ruby Stephen G
Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh, UPMC Shadyside Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pa 15232, USA.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005 Apr;129(4):459-66. doi: 10.5858/2005-129-459-PSIAPM.
Anatomic pathology discrepancy frequencies have not been rigorously studied.
To determine the frequency of anatomic pathology discrepancies and the causes of these discrepancies.
Participants in the College of American Pathologists Q-Probes program self-reported the number of anatomic pathology discrepancies in their laboratories by prospectively performing secondary review (post-sign-out) of 100 surgical pathology or cytology specimens. Reasons for the secondary review included conferences, external review, internal quality assurance policy, and physician request.
Seventy-four laboratories self-reported data.
Frequency of anatomic pathology discrepancy; type of discrepancy (ie, change in margin status, change in diagnosis, change in patient information, or typographic error); effect of discrepancy on patient outcome (ie, no harm, near miss, or harm); and clarity of report.
The mean and median laboratory discrepancy frequencies were 6.7% and 5.1%, respectively. Forty-eight percent of all discrepancies were due to a change within the same category of interpretation (eg, 1 tumor type was changed to another tumor type). Twenty-one percent of all discrepancies were due to a change across categories of interpretation (eg, a benign diagnosis was changed to a malignant diagnosis). Although the majority of discrepancies had no effect on patient care, 5.3% had a moderate or marked effect on patient care.Conclusions.-This study establishes a mean multi-institutional discrepancy frequency (related to secondary review) of 6.7%.
解剖病理学差异的频率尚未得到严格研究。
确定解剖病理学差异的频率及其原因。
美国病理学家学会Q-Probes项目的参与者通过前瞻性地对100份手术病理学或细胞学标本进行二次审查(签出后),自行报告其实验室中解剖病理学差异的数量。二次审查的原因包括会议、外部审查、内部质量保证政策和医生要求。
74个实验室自行报告数据。
解剖病理学差异的频率;差异类型(即切缘状态改变、诊断改变、患者信息改变或排版错误);差异对患者结局的影响(即无伤害、险些失误或伤害);以及报告的清晰度。
各实验室差异频率的均值和中位数分别为6.7%和5.1%。所有差异中有48%是由于同一解释类别内的改变(例如,一种肿瘤类型被改为另一种肿瘤类型)。所有差异中有21%是由于不同解释类别间的改变(例如,良性诊断被改为恶性诊断)。尽管大多数差异对患者护理没有影响,但5.3%的差异对患者护理有中度或显著影响。
本研究确定了平均多机构差异频率(与二次审查相关)为6.7%。